250 



Memoirs Bciiiicc P. nisht^l" Miisciini 



TABLE IV. COMPARISON OF NASAL WIDTH, NASAL HEICHT, AM) NASAL 



ORDER OF MAGNITl'DE OF NASAL WIDTH. 



N.\S.\L N.\S.\L NASAL 



r.ROL'P WIDTH HEIOHT INDEX 



Kajji. Nigeria 45.0 40.0 91.0 



i\Iawanil)i pygmy 4.5.0 



Tonga 44.4 S7.5 77.6 



Toricelli, New Guinea 44.3 



Fan 44.0 48.0 91.1 



Kagoro, Nigeria 44.0 47.0 92.9 



Sentani, New Guinea 44.0 49.0 87.9 



Humboldt Bav, New Guinea 44.0 53.0 83.7 



Samoa .'. 43.8 59.8 73.6 



Slioshoni Amerindian 43.4 52.2 83.1 



Cliippewa Amerindian 42.8 56.5 75.5 



Negrito, Zambales 42.8 40.5 106.0 



AFaricopa .\merindian 41.4 49.0 85.2 



Tagalog lUilakan 41.0 50.0 82.0 



Tagalog, Rizal 41.0 51.0 80.5 



Bisaya Iloilo 41.0 49.0 84.1 



Nahuqua Amerindian 40.5 



Iloko. Ilokos Norte 40.0 55.0 73.1 



Senoi 40.0 47.0 85.0 



Dolan, Turkestan 39.9 51.2 78.9 



vSubanun 39.9 52.6 74.8 



Sioux Amerindian 39.9 58.3 68.8 



Sundanese 39.0 45.1 86.9 



Banjerese 38.8 44.3 88.0 



Kirghiz 38.2 49.3 78.1 



Dombs, India 38.0 44.0 86.5 



.\ino 38.0 55.9 68.0 



Nabaloi, Benguet 38.0 40.0 95.0 



South Antlamanese 37.7 42.7 88.2 



Egyptian 37.3 48.7 76.6 



Polish Jew 37.0 51.0 72.6 



Little Russian lew 37.0 53.0 69.8 



Khotan, Turkestan 36.9 49.9 74.7 



INDICES ARRANGED IN 



AUTHOR 



Tremearne 



INIartin 



Sullivan 



Martin 



Martin 



Tremearne 



\ an der Sande 



Van der Sande 



Sullivan 



Boas 



Ilrdlicka 



Reed 



Ten Kate 



Folkmar 



Folkmar 



Folkmar 



Martin 



Folkmar 



Martin 



Jo>ce 



Christie 



Sullivan 



Garrett 



Garrett 



Joyce 



Fawcett 



Koganei 



Bean 



IMartin 



Martin 



Fishberg 



Fishberg 



Jovce 



The forehead of the Tongau is well developed and presents a rather gradual 

 slope. The glabella is developed only to a moderate degree. Though the lips are 

 designated as of medium thickness (PI. xxxvi. /?), it is obvious that if our stand- 

 ards were more sensitive we should find that they were somewhat above the aver- 

 age in thickness. As a group the Tongans are not i)rognathous. However it is 

 safe to say that the face is more projecting than that of the European. The chin 

 is positive but not so prominent a feature as that of Europeans. (See PI. xxxvii, 

 A and xxxvii, f>.) The ears are large but offer no points of si)ecial interest. 

 The rim on the lingual surface of the upi)er incisor teeth is tyi)ically not well 

 developed. It was noticed, however, in what may be termed a moderate degree 

 of frequency. 



[20j 



